Beauty awakens the mind, and develops it. Certainly no one would argue against a mind open to the subtle joys of life? In my opinion, anything that inclines the mind to thoughtful contemplation is a good, and should be celebrated. http://www.facebook.com/alan.hoelzle

alan wrote:Beauty awakens the mind, and develops it. Certainly no one would argue against a mind open to the subtle joys of life? In my opinion, anything that inclines the mind to thoughtful contemplation is a good, and should be celebrated. http://www.facebook.com/alan.hoelzle

You do not subscribe to Puritan Buddhism?

This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723

>> Do you see a man wise[enlightened/ariya]in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<<-- Proverbs 26:12

Hello, gentlemen, and best wishes for a happy, healthy 2013. Just got caught up with everything that remained undone after a year-end vacation and would like to thank you for all your comments. Unfortunately, I don't have the background to follow some of the points being made here and I remain as confused as when I first started this thread several weeks ago. How is it, if beauty is part of the object, that two people can see the same object as both beautiful and ugly? This is true within cultures, and perhaps even more so across them, suggesting many (but perhaps not all) aesthetic properties are socially constructed.